IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v29y2020i7-8p1129-1140.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Movements and trends in intensive care pain treatment and sedation: What matters to the patient?

Author

Listed:
  • Hilde Wøien

Abstract

Background Oversedation, delirium and immobilisation in the intensive care unit are associated with increased length of stay in the unit. Routines of systematic pain and sedation assessment and the use of valid tools are highly stressed in international guidelines. For improving the quality of pain treatment and sedation in a Norwegian intensive care unit, in 2009–2015, we compared supplementation with an analgosedation approach and the existing systematic approach, measured by the adherence to current international pain, sedation and delirium guidelines. Methods In a longitudinal study following the Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies, pain, sedation, delirium and mobilisation data from patients' complete intensive care unit stays, encompassing three separate periods of 4–6 months, were compared. The primary outcome was adherence to current protocol including assessment and documentation of patients' level of pain, sedation and prevalence of delirium at least every 8 hr, early mobilisation and titration towards a light level of sedation. Results We included 205 patients, corresponding to 1,607 patient intensive care unit days. The patient sedation levels, measured by the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale, decreased significantly, from −2.2 in 2009–−1.7 in 2015, so did the amount of administrated propofol. Mean pain scores measured by the numeric rating scale during activity were maximum 3.1 in 2014, decreasing to 2.2 in 2015. In patients not able to self‐report, pain mean scores were 1.7 in 2014 and 1.6 in 2015, measured by the Critical Care Pain Observational Tool. The number of patients unable to assess for delirium decreased significantly. By discounting the group of patients unable to assess, the prevalence of delirium varied from 32%, 25% and 33%. Conclusion The goal of having an awake patient able to cooperate, with acceptable levels of pain, was gradually achieved during a 6‐year period. The results showed that pain treatment and sedation in the intensive care unit primarily succeeded in the setting of an established routine of systematic assessment and documentation. Relevance to clinical practice The results of the study draw attention to pain treatment, sedation and delirium in intensive care patients, as well as implementation strategies aimed at achieving healthcare personnel's adherence to international guidelines in clinical practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Hilde Wøien, 2020. "Movements and trends in intensive care pain treatment and sedation: What matters to the patient?," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(7-8), pages 1129-1140, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:7-8:p:1129-1140
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.15179
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15179
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.15179?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hilde Wøien & Henning Værøy & Geir Aamodt & Ida T Bjørk, 2014. "Improving the systematic approach to pain and sedation management in the ICU by using assessment tools," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(11-12), pages 1552-1561, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Reidun K. Sandvik & Brita F. Olsen & Lars‐Jørgen Rygh & Asgjerd Litlere Moi, 2020. "Pain relief from nonpharmacological interventions in the intensive care unit: A scoping review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(9-10), pages 1488-1498, May.
    2. Jie Chen & Fen Hu & Jian Yang & Xiao‐Ying Wu & Yi Feng & Yan‐Chun Zhan & You‐Zhong An & Qian Lu & Hai‐Yan Zhang, 2019. "Validation of a Chinese version critical‐care pain observation tool in nonintubated and intubated critically ill patients: Two cross‐sectional studies," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(15-16), pages 2824-2832, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:7-8:p:1129-1140. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.